Scientiafide wrote:Pikeru was saying that if everyone is using shade, the win % of players using shade would be 50% (since everyone's using it).

Anyway, to the matter of return and shade, I will say that in magic the gathering the card common to all mono-red decks are mountains. Since every red-deck win uses mountains, does this mean mountains are op?

Did you read my mind, I was gonna post about the overuse of Mountains in MTG also!

The most absurd argument that could be thought of. Land is staple because it's MTG's source of SP. Mountains are NOT 1 cost creatures that say "Destroy target land." Just like Alteil needs SP to play cards, MTG almost always needs land to play cards. There's no cards that can be compared to land since it's been translated to a game mechanic that automatically gives you 2 land each turn.

Romdeau wrote:Cards that are auto-includes because of their flexibility (ability to use in just about any file) does not alone warrant a nerf.

You may not be aware of this, but shade was the target of a rather heavy nerf a long time ago. So it's not like these cards are immune or something.

I'm more than well aware of Shade's so-called "nerf" it's had in the past, I've referenced it multiple times before as do countless others, a person who's been paying attention would've noticed. However, it wasn't nearly enough to lower its power or usage in the slightest. Rather than a 1 cost creature that says "destroy two target lands" it's now still a 1 cost creature that says "destroy target land". This kind of card would never exist in a balanced game and is still enough to influence every single deck's opening options in this game and limits them to a very select few or risk having your entire strategy countered since turn 1. This is a monotony and is not healthy. I'll quote myself yet again, "The closest card of this type of effect is Sinkhole from MTG which costs twice as much AND is not a creature", which is an important point in this game as creatures here refund their cost and trigger a SS when they die.

You claim flexibility doesn't warrant a nerf, yet every other game disagrees with this sentiment. Generic cards such as: Skullclamp, Moxes+Black Lotus(MTG), Overload(Vs.), Pot of Greed, Magician of Faith, Mirror Force and countless others(Yugioh). I can confidently tell you none of these cards would've needed banning if they only worked in 1 specific archetype and/or had a restriction limiting them to those archetypes. Matter-of-factly, most have them have already been successfully reprinted into specific archetypes with restrictions and without incident since.

Pikeru wrote:The most absurd argument that could be thought of. ..blahblah

If someone presents an absurd argument, it should be countered by another absurd argument.

One of my files has Rapid Growths along with Salamanders, another file has Meaning of Failure. Ex Wizard of Regus is in most of my WizKingdom files. Many Big Reds are going to have Sakura and every Carbuncle file has Ruby General. Also, Distier and Asuet SS's are the most common. Tiem Fur Nerfs pwease?

It's easy to ignore someone's points and call them biased, this is just dodging the issue and not constructive. I'm not even certain why you're bringing up sp gens and creatures that haven't even been brought up. Generating sp is less than half as effective as draining it, I can easily say Sage Owl and Birds of Paradise are exactly the same card. All the creatures you mention are archetype specific or have restrictions, which further adds to the point I just made of powerful cards needing said restrictions. Shade and Return are not archetype specific and do not have restrictions. However, you do accidentally bring up a good point, MoF could probably do with a buff removing the "gain 3 sp" part of its effect even if the "gain 5" is left at its current percentage.

Pikeru wrote:It's easy to ignore someone's points and call them biased, this is just dodging the issue and not constructive.

but yet a few posts back

Pikeru wrote:...At this point, return and send-to-grave have been around so long, it seems to be more a matter of bias....

Ho ho ho

The argument of MTG will only work to a point because they phase out cards where you can only use the 3 recent sets. The reason to phase out Dark Ritual (3 black mana gain) was because they wanted to have some new units that would have combo'd too well with that card. MTG will make cards obsolete left and right regardless.

Legacy or rather Type 1.5 MTG exists, since you forgot. MTG has multiple formats and even numerous more so in MTG Online, something this game lacks. If you're going to compare Alteil to MTG, you have to use 1.5 as it includes all sets.

GonFreeces31 wrote:I liked the argument you made about how return is the same as 3 fire arrows and a bitter destiny all at once. Haven't heard that one before.

Where everyone else just wants to state fact without putting in effort to explain, I'd rather not waste my time. Thus why I make supporting statements and examples to back up what I say, like what you just quoted. Creatures have 3 lives and refund their cost when they die. A Fire Arrow removes one life and Bitter Destiny steals the sp refund. Return ignores those lives and the creature's refund, meaning it does the job of 4 cards at once.

Pikeru wrote:Legacy or rather Type 1.5 MTG exists, since you forgot. MTG has multiple formats and even numerous more so in MTG Online, something this game lacks. If you're going to compare Alteil to MTG, you have to use 1.5 as it includes all sets.

Alright, fine. 1.5 doesn't ban Counterspell, Dark Ritual, and just slews of other cards that has been in multiple files forever, and the use of those cards doesn't have restrictions either. No, I did not forget, just if I used Type 1.5 example, it blows your argument out of the water.

Where everyone else just wants to state fact without putting in effort to explain, I'd rather not waste my time. Thus why I make supporting statements and examples to back up what I say, like what you just quoted. Creatures have 3 lives and refund their cost when they die. A Fire Arrow removes one life and Bitter Destiny steals the sp refund. Return ignores those lives and the creature's refund, meaning it does the job of 4 cards at once.

It's fine, don't waste your time because supporting statements like that (for a lack of a better word) SUCK. Somehow you are comparing removing the 3 lives to Return? When I kill a creature 3 times, it usually doesn't come back unless revive/cemetery retrieval. If something gets Return, it doesn't die, the person can recast it, Open skills and all.

Last edited by Icyglare on Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:00 am, edited 1 time in total.

Typically they aren't going to bounce an open skill. Sure, they can recast it, but they can also just play a different creature as well. Having those copies sit in the grave would only matter if they started running low in other options. Even then, it takes an additional 2 turns to play the creature, another point I've made multiple times. Your opponent's field has been ravaged for a minimum of 3 turns. That's the turn they played the creature, 1 more turn that it got returned and another for the turn it takes to replay it. In addition, they also lose more turns equivalent to the time they choose to or are forced to wait before replaying it. If they never replay it or never have the chance, all 3 may as well have actually been tossed into the grave. With Cyclone, you have to add the sum of every monster sniped.